Model comparison
Llama 3.2 90B vs Muse Glimmer
Muse Glimmer is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- The widest gap is in math, where Muse Glimmer leads 36.1 to 10.4.
Side by side
| Llama 3.2 90B | Muse Glimmer | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 27.1 | 41.3 |
| Released | 2024-09-24 | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 9 | 13 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Llama 3.2 90B: —, Muse Glimmer: 38.7 (#157)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Muse Glimmer |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1355 |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1417 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Llama 3.2 90B: 29.7 (#73), Muse Glimmer: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Muse Glimmer |
|---|---|---|
| BALROG | 27.3% | — |
Reasoning Muse Glimmer leads
Llama 3.2 90B: 20.9 (#207), Muse Glimmer: 27.2 (#111)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Muse Glimmer |
|---|---|---|
| EnigmaEval | 0.4% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1395 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 125.5 | — |
Math Muse Glimmer leads
Llama 3.2 90B: 10.4 (#302), Muse Glimmer: 36.1 (#128)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Muse Glimmer |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 2.6% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1419 |
| MATH Level 5 | 39.4% | — |
Knowledge Muse Glimmer leads
Llama 3.2 90B: 21.7 (#269), Muse Glimmer: 37.9 (#140)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Muse Glimmer |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 41% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1388 |
| MMLU | 80.3% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Llama 3.2 90B: 24.9 (#119), Muse Glimmer: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Muse Glimmer |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1000 | — |
| GeoBench | 52% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Llama 3.2 90B: —, Muse Glimmer: 50.6 (#117)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Muse Glimmer |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1384 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1412 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1393 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Llama 3.2 90B: —, Muse Glimmer: 72.7 (#134)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Muse Glimmer |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1374 |
Long Context Not comparable
Llama 3.2 90B: —, Muse Glimmer: 42.1 (#124)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Muse Glimmer |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1381 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Llama 3.2 90B: —, Muse Glimmer: 57.7 (#122)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 90B | Muse Glimmer |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1389 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1338 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1398 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 3.2 90B better than Muse Glimmer?
Muse Glimmer is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.3 to 27.1 on the Noometry Index.
How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 90B and Muse Glimmer share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.2 90B has 9 scored results on Noometry and Muse Glimmer has 13.